24 research outputs found

    Raltegravir in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV infection

    Get PDF
    Raltegravir, an inhibitor of the HIV-1 integrase enzyme, is the first available agent in a new class of antiretroviral drugs. Raltegravir has been studied extensively in clinical trials, and has been well tolerated and highly effective in both treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Resistance to raltegravir is unusual given its recent availability, but resistance with identified viral mutation pathways in the integrase gene in patients receiving the drug does occur

    Long-Term Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Indinavir-Based Therapy in Protease Inhibitor—Naive Adults with Advanced HIV Infection

    Get PDF
    A double-blind, randomized study of zidovudine-experienced, PI- and lamivudine-naive adults with baseline CD4 cell counts of ⩽50 cells/mm3 had demonstrated that the HIV suppression achieved with zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir therapy was superior to that achieved with dual-nucleoside or indinavir-only regimens after 24 weeks of therapy. In a 192-week extension of the study, 371 participants received open-label indinavir with or without other antiretroviral drugs. One hundred and eight subjects were originally randomized to receive triple therapy. After 216 weeks, the proportion of subjects with HIV RNA levels of <500 copies/mL were 34%, according to a general estimating equation analysis, 92%, according to an observed data analysis, and 24%, according to an intention-to-treat analysis counting noncompleters as failures; the proportions of subjects with HIV RNA levels of <50 copies/mL were 31%, 85%, and 22%, respectively. Hyperbilirubinemia (experienced by 31% of subjects), nausea (17%), abdominal pain (14%), and nephrolithiasis (13%) were the most common drug-related adverse events during the extensio

    Efficacy and safety of raltegravir for treatment of HIV for 5 years in the BENCHMRK studies: Final results of two randomised, placebo-controlled trials

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Two randomised, placebo-controlled trials-BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2-investigated the efficacy and safety of raltegravir, an HIV-1 integrase strand-transfer inhibitor. We report final results of BENCHMRK-1 and BENCHMRK-2 combined at 3 years (the end of the double-blind phase) and 5 years (the end of the study). METHODS: Integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with HIV resistant to three classes of drug and who were failing antiretroviral therapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to raltegravir 400 mg twice daily or placebo, both with optimised background treatment. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until week 156, after which all patients were offered open-label raltegravir until week 240. The primary endpoint was previously assessed at 16 weeks. We assessed long-term efficacy with endpoints of the proportion of patients with an HIV viral load of less than 50 copies per mL and less than 400 copies per mL, and mean change in CD4 cell count, at weeks 156 and 240. FINDINGS: 1012 patients were screened for inclusion. 462 were treated with raltegravir and 237 with placebo. At week 156, 51% in the raltegravir group versus 22% in the placebo group (non-completer classed as failure) had viral loads of less than 50 copies per mL, and 54% versus 23% had viral loads of less than 400 copies per mL. Mean CD4 cell count increase (analysed by an observed failure approach) was 164 cells per μL versus 63 cells per μL. After week 156, 251 patients (54%) from the raltegravir group and 47 (20%) from the placebo group entered the open-label raltergravir phase; 221 (47%) versus 44 (19%) completed the entire study. At week 240, viral load was less than 50 copies per mL in 193 (42%) of all patients initially assigned to raltegravir and less than 400 copies per mL in 210 (45%); mean CD4 cell count increased by 183 cells per μL. Virological failure occurred in 166 raltegravir recipients (36%) during the double-blind phase and in 17 of all patients (6%) during the open-label phase. The most common drug-related adverse events at 5 years in both groups were nausea, headache, and diarrhoea, and occurred in similar proportions in each group. Laboratory test results were similar in both treatment groups and showed little change after year 2. INTERPRETATION: Raltegravir has a favourable long-term efficacy and safety profile in integrase-inhibitor-naive patients with triple-class resistant HIV in whom antiretroviral therapy is failing. Raltegravir is an alternative for treatment-experienced patients, particularly those with few treatment options

    Raltegravir with Optimized Background Therapy for Resistant HIV-1 Infection

    Get PDF
    Background: Raltegravir (MK-0518) is an inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) integrase active against HIV-1 susceptible or resistant to older antiretroviral drugs. Methods: We conducted two identical trials in different geographic regions to evaluate the safety and efficacy of raltegravir, as compared with placebo, in combination with optimized background therapy, in patients infected with HIV-1 that has triple-class drug resistance in whom antiretroviral therapy had failed. Patients were randomly assigned to raltegravir or placebo in a 2:1 ratio. Results: In the combined studies, 699 of 703 randomized patients (462 and 237 in the raltegravir and placebo groups, respectively) received the study drug. Seventeen of the 699 patients (2.4%) discontinued the study before week 16. Discontinuation was related to the study treatment in 13 of these 17 patients: 7 of the 462 raltegravir recipients (1.5%) and 6 of the 237 placebo recipients (2.5%). The results of the two studies were consistent. At week 16, counting noncompletion as treatment failure, 355 of 458 raltegravir recipients (77.5%) had HIV-1 RNA levels below 400 copies per milliliter, as compared with 99 of 236 placebo recipients (41.9%, P<0.001). Suppression of HIV-1 RNA to a level below 50 copies per milliliter was achieved at week 16 in 61.8% of the raltegravir recipients, as compared with 34.7% of placebo recipients, and at week 48 in 62.1% as compared with 32.9% (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Without adjustment for the length of follow-up, cancers were detected in 3.5% of raltegravir recipients and in 1.7% of placebo recipients. The overall frequencies of drug-related adverse events were similar in the raltegravir and placebo groups. Conclusions: In HIV-infected patients with limited treatment options, raltegravir plus optimized background therapy provided better viral suppression than optimized background therapy alone for at least 48 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00293267 and NCT00293254.

    Subgroup and Resistance Analyses of Raltegravir for Resistant HIV-1 Infection

    Get PDF
    Background: We evaluated the efficacy of raltegravir and the development of viral resistance in two identical trials involving patients who were infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) with triple-class drug resistance and in whom antiretroviral therapy had failed. Methods: We conducted subgroup analyses of the data from week 48 in both studies according to baseline prognostic factors. Genotyping of the integrase gene was performed in raltegravir recipients who had virologic failure. Results: Virologic responses to raltegravir were consistently superior to responses to placebo, regardless of the baseline values of HIV-1 RNA level; CD4 cell count; genotypic or phenotypic sensitivity score; use or nonuse of darunavir, enfuvirtide, or both in optimized background therapy; or demographic characteristics. Among patients in the two studies combined who were using both enfuvirtide and darunavir for the first time, HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter were achieved in 89% of raltegravir recipients and 68% of placebo recipients. HIV-1 RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter were achieved in 69% and 80% of the raltegravir recipients and in 47% and 57% of the placebo recipients using either darunavir or enfuvirtide for the first time, respectively. At 48 weeks, 105 of the 462 raltegravir recipients (23%) had virologic failure. Genotyping was performed in 94 raltegravir recipients with virologic failure. Integrase mutations known to be associated with phenotypic resistance to raltegravir arose during treatment in 64 patients (68%). Forty-eight of these 64 patients (75%) had two or more resistance-associated mutations. Conclusions: When combined with an optimized background regimen in both studies, a consistently favorable treatment effect of raltegravir over placebo was shown in clinically relevant subgroups of patients, including those with baseline characteristics that typically predict a poor response to antiretroviral therapy: a high HIV-1 RNA level, low CD4 cell count, and low genotypic or phenotypic sensitivity score. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00293267 and NCT00293254.

    Phagocytic and Bactericidal Properties of Normal Human Monocytes

    No full text

    Phagocytic and bactericidal properties of normal human monocytes

    No full text
    A B S T R A C T The bactericidal and phagocytic capacities of monocytes for E. coli, Staphylococcus, Salmonella, and Listeria, and factors that influence these functions were evaluated and compared with those of the polymorphonuclear leukocytes of 30 normal human subjects. Monocytes killed a significantly smaller proportion of each of the bacterial species than did neutrophils from the same individuals. Whereas the neutrophils of all individuals demonstrated the ability to kill significant numbers of the four bacterial species, there was a marked variation in the effect of monocytes of different individuals on the growth curves of these same bacteria. When the bactericidal capacity of an individual&apos;s monocytes to more than one species of bacteria was examined in the same experiment, a significant difference in the effect of monocytes on the growth curve of one bacterial species as opposed to another was noted in 4 of 17 subjects. The bactericidal ability of monocytes of single individuals was consistent on different days in 9 of the 11 subjects whose monocytes were examined more than once against the same bacteria. nificantly less well than neutrophils, but the intracellular killing capacity of both cell types is equal. Addition of phenylbutazone to cell suspensions completely inhibited intracellular killing by both monocytes and neutrophils, suggesting the possibility that the bactericidal mechanisms in both cell types might be similar. Monocyte killing of E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria, but not of Staphylococcus, was significantly diminished in heat-inactivated autologous serum. Neither increasing the concentration of autologous serum from 10% to 25% nor replacement of autologous serum with pooled human serum had any effect on monocyte killing of any of the four bacteria. These studies demonstrate that peripheral blood monocytes are less bactericidal for the four bacterial species than neutrophils, solely because monocytes are less phagocytic. A baseline for further study of factors that influence monocyte function and for study of this cell in selected patient populations is provided

    Perspective: Emerging Challenges in the Treatment of Influenza and Parainfluenza in Transplant Patients

    Get PDF
    Influenza, respiratory synctial virus, and parainfluenza are common respiratory infections in immunocompromised transplant recipients, causing significant morbidity and mortality in this patient population. This paper focuses on influenza and parainfluenza virus infections in transplant patients with emphasis on the pandemic 2009 H1N1 influenza infection. Current antiviral treatment recommendations for influenza and parainfluenza in immunocompromised patients as well as novel investigational therapeutic approaches currently being tested in the clinic are discussed. In addition to the morbidity and mortality caused by these viruses, the development of multidrug resistance leading to transmission of resistant viruses is of great public health concern. The development of effective new therapies for influenza and parainfluenza in these high-risk patients is needed with randomized placebo-controlled studies to assess their clinical utility
    corecore